HANIF ANSARI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND
LAWS(JHAR)-2006-8-90
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on August 22,2006

Hanif Ansari Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

AMARESHWAR SAHAY, J. - (1.)ALL the four appellants were charged for the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Cod for assaulting Abdul Hamid Ansari. Rasid Ansari, Habib Ansari and others with an intention to kill them. They were further charged under Section 324/34 of the Indian Penal Code for committing theft of standing paddy crops of Abdul Hamid Ansari. The learned Trial Court, by impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 9.2.2004 and 10.2.2004 in Sessions Trial No. 90 of 1997, convicted the appellants for the offence under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code only and sentenced them to undergo Rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years each.
(2.)THE prosecution case in short is that on 28.10.1996, at about 9.00 a.m., Kalim Ansari. Hanif Ansari, Rozauddin Ansari and Gambhir Ansari (appellants herein) were cutting the paddy from the field of the informant i.e. from Plot No. 546, Khata No. 82, Area 0.29 Acres of Village -Badhni, PS -Sisai, District - Gumla. The informant tried to stop the accused persons but, they chased him for assault. At this, the informant raised hulla and then on hearing his hulla. his son Rasid Ansari (PW -2), Hasib Ansari (PW -4), his daughter Shakila Khatoon (PW -2) and brother Nafruddin Ansari (PW -1) came to rescue him. The appellant Kalim Ansari assaulted the informant with sword resulting injury on his left finger and elbow. Appellant Hanif Ansari and Rozauddin Ansari assaulted the son of the informant Rasid Ansari (PW -2) with Balua resulting injury to his both hands and head. Appellant Kalim Ansari assaulted his daughter Sakila (PW -2) with Sikkel resulting injury to her head. Appellant Gaiiibhir Ansari assaulted his son Hasib Ansari (PW -4) with a danda resulting injury to him. Appellant Rozauddin Ansari assaulted his younger brother Nafruddin Ansari (PW -1) with Balua resulting injury to his left hand. According to the informant, the occurrence was witnessed by Kayum Ansari, Anwar Ansari and others.
The defence was complete denial of the allegations and of false implication.

(3.)IN order to establish the charges, altogether nine witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution out of which, PWs -1, 2, 3 and 4 are the injured witnesses who received injury in the said occurrence. PW 7 Abdul Hamid Ansari is the informant himself who also received injuries in the occurrence PW 5 Kayum Ansari and PW -8 Anwar Ansari are the witnesses who reached the place of occurrence after hearing hulla, PW -6 is the Investigating Officer whereas, PW -9 is the doctor who examined the injured persons. On behalf of the defence also, three witnesses were examined.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.